Bumpy ride

Last Updated: Saturday 04 July 2015 | 02:50:09 AM

BERLIN, almost 3 years after the
Earth Summit at Rio. Once again, a
storm buffets the I I day-long
Climate Summit held here from
March 28 to April 7. The issue is
whether the threat - that there is a
threat is undeniable - of a possible
global climate change is big enough
to demand any significant action.
This summit was a no-give battle
between the environmental lobby
versus the joint oil and coal lobby.
For once, the environmentalists
declared the meet "satisfactory";
the oil and coal industry called it a
'disaster".

The summit, technically the
first conference of the climate
change treaty signatories, agreed to
Start negotiations to fix targets for
industrialised countries to taper off
their greenhouse gas emissions. No
Ww commitments were asked of developing countries. It was also agreed that
isegotiations would be complete by
'1997, and would lead to another protoWol to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

It is implicit that industrialised
ntries would have to reduce their oil
coal consumption, while - initial-
at least - developing countries
uld be allowed to increase their
nhouse gas emissions. In the long
these machinations are a step
ds shifting the world's energy path
m fossil fuels to renewable energy
in the short term, however, the
ent use of oil and coal will be
emphasised.

The conference started with small
nd countries actively supported by
ironmentalists, pushing the induslised countries to cut their carbon
Ride emissions - the major green-
w gas - by 20 per cent by AD 2005.
duck this swipe, the USA and
tralia burst into praise of an earlier
man proposal to ask the bigger
elovine countries like India and
China to prunq their carbon dioxide
emissions as well. Their argument was
that these countries are likely to emit
greenhouse gases on a large scale in the
near future, and that they have the
wherewithal to neutralise any reductions by the industrialised countries.

This quid pro quo is obviously controversial, and several major environ-
mental organisations hinged their support to the industrialised nations or this
ground. Organisations like Greenpeace
and the us-based Environmental
Defense Fund were, in fact, putting a
boot forward by planning to orgamse
public campaigns to exploit the economic vulnerability of the developing
countries by proposing a moratorium
on foreign assistance to all projects
which may lead to emissions.

The Centre for Science and
Environment, India, which has been
campaigning against the North's stand
on issues relating to climate change,
interpreted this step of looking to the
future and ignoring past and current
emissions as inherently "flawed". The
Climate Action Network (CAN), an
influential coalition of environmental groups the world over
working on climate issues, finally
agreed to oppose this proposal.

This remarkable consolidation
of opinion forced German environment minister Angela Merkel to
withdraw the proposal. Besides,
German Chancellor Helmut Kohl
told the delegates at the conference
that his government, supported
by the European Community, has
announced plans to cut emissions
by more than 20 per cent by
AD 2005.

This isolited the us and
Australia, locking them in their
wish for morp time to discuss emissions reduction. Tim Wirth, head
of the us delegation, reacting to the
lobbying by 'CAN, said that the
strong influences of the opposition
Republican Party - a majority in the
us Congress -hindered any separate move in this regard. And the
Republican members, lobbied by the
powerful oil industry, persuaded the
us delegation to agree to cuts in emissions only if the developing countries
played ball.

However, the besieged us delegation
failed to extract any commitments from
the developing countries. The only concession it received was a green signal
from developing countries to commence joint implementation (g) on an
experimental basis. This enables those
industrialised countries which find it
economically or politically difficult to
reduce their emissions, to receive credits
for doing so in the developing countries
by modernising inefficient energy systems. Developing countries, including
India, which earlier were completely
opposed to ii, now agreed to open doors
for experimentation until AD 2000,
when it will be reviewed for establishing
the mechanism to exchange credits.

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter :

We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.

Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.

Down To Earth is a product of our commitment to make changes in the way we manage our environment, protect health and secure livelihoods and economic security for all. We believe strongly that we can and must do things differently. Our aim is to bring you news, perspectives and knowledge to prepare you to change the world. We believe information is a powerful driver for the new tomorrow.